PDA

View Full Version : The Ki-100-I Ko "vs" US fighters!



DIRTY-MAC
11-08-2004, 04:07 AM
In many books about WWII JAAF fihters
there is written that the Ki-100 was "the best" fighter that Japan made during the war.
I wonder how this will performe in PF?
It should be very manouvreble and have exellent handling and climb very well(in a steep angle), but it will not
be so fast.
how will it perform against the US late fighters?
what tactics should you use against them?
will it be better than the Ki-84?

What is your opinions on the Ki-100-I Ko?

Maple_Tiger
11-08-2004, 04:40 AM
I thought the KI-100 was just a myth?

ELEM
11-08-2004, 04:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
I thought the KI-100 was just a myth? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A total of 396 of those "myths" built...

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki100.html

The_Ant
11-08-2004, 05:22 AM
i wonder if it will be as good as it was in RL,in such case we maybe are getting a japanese la7. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
I sense some incoming whinning about this plane.


Ki-100-equipped unit destroyed 14 F6F Hellcat fighters without loss to themselves. When the Ki-100 encountered the P-51D Mustang at low or medium altitudes over Japan, it was able to meet the American fighter on more or less equal terms. The outcome of P- 51D vs Ki-100 battles was usually determined by piloting skill or by numerical advantage rather than by the relative merits of the two fighter types.

DeerHunterUK
11-08-2004, 05:24 AM
It's definitely not a myth, there's a Ki-100 residing at the RAF Museum in Hendon. It was considered by many to be the equal in terms of combat to the P-51 Mustang with numbers (obviously) being the deciding factor in encounters between the 2 aircraft.

Ruy Horta
11-08-2004, 05:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
It should be very manouvreble and have exellent handling and climb very well(in a steep angle), but it will not be so fast. how will it perform against the US late fighters? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It won't be more than a mediocre climber. Been looking at the figures a while ago and purley on paper it did not perform exceptional other than at high altitude.

We had a big discussion on the Ki 100 some months ago, lot of figures were posted, perhaps it would be worthwhile to search for them.

Ruy Horta
11-08-2004, 05:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Ant:
Ki-100-equipped unit destroyed 14 F6F Hellcat fighters without loss to themselves. When the Ki-100 encountered the P-51D Mustang at low or medium altitudes over Japan, it was able to meet the American fighter on more or less equal terms. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Three observations.

One is that you have to be very careful with Japanese claims when it comes to numbers and ratios. Genrally the Japanese tend to be on the high end when it comes to overclaiming.

Two is that the allies weren't as impressed as you'd think they should have been if the Ki 100 had been that good, since they didn't recognise the a/c as a new type until after the war.

Three is about the way a lot of books are written. Instead of objective and independant analysis many writers simply copy work of previous researchers (or hacks) and said writing becomes established "fact".

This is not about "debunking" Japanese claims nor the quality of their a/c, but if I look at similar examples in terms of a/c and men they do tend towards "myth making".

It might be a cultural thing.

Giganoni
11-08-2004, 05:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ruy Horta:


This is not about "debunking" Japanese claims nor the quality of their a/c, but if I look at similar examples in terms of a/c and men they do tend towards "myth making".

It might be a cultural thing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It might be a "I'm in a **** dogfight and cant remember seeing the enemy that I shot at go down or not nor do I have the time to look" thing.

The_Ant
11-08-2004, 06:03 AM
in the book aces of the rising sun
by henry sakaida
several ki-100 aces are potreyed,and their statement was that the ki-100 was one of the best army fighters besides ki-84,that could fight the p51,corsair,p47 and hellcat on equal terms.

Your right about the overclaims,the japanese overclaimed in many cases this is also stated in the book above.But every country overclaimed in ww2,even so if the 14 hellcats claims were halfed it would still be a good score.

Hendley
11-08-2004, 06:16 AM
Ant makes a good point about overclaims; even the RAF flyers during the BoB (when there were often ground observers present and wrecks could be discovered), overclaimed almost 2:1.

That the Allies failed to recognize it as a new type doesn't necessarily mean much. Heck, for much of the war every single-engined Japanese fighter was invariably called a "Zero". Plus there was very little intelligence available to the Allies about what was actually being designed and built in Japan.

Biloxi72
11-08-2004, 07:01 AM
Nice thing about Il2 series is that all of these planes will be running at optimal performance standards. So the late war Japanese planes do not have to worry about poor craftmanship, lack of quality parts and poor fuel or lack of it. As for whining im sure some US pilots will be a bit miffed only that the Axis side for the most part get their late war craft and US gets all of it's early to mid war series. I think that the f4u-4 should be modeled and put into the game. It saw 6 months of action, produced in decent numbers and should not be that hard to find data on. I think that is why most Ameriwhiners do whine, we simply dont get all the late war craft while the axis does.
At least ill get a lot of satisfaction if i can shoot down a ki84 in my f4u-1d.

VW-IceFire
11-08-2004, 07:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RufShod:
Nice thing about Il2 series is that all of these planes will be running at optimal performance standards. So the late war Japanese planes do not have to worry about poor craftmanship, lack of quality parts and poor fuel or lack of it. As for whining im sure some US pilots will be a bit miffed only that the Axis side for the most part get their late war craft and US gets all of it's early to mid war series. I think that the f4u-4 should be modeled and put into the game. It saw 6 months of action, produced in decent numbers and should not be that hard to find data on. I think that is why most Ameriwhiners do whine, we simply dont get all the late war craft while the axis does.
At least ill get a lot of satisfaction if i can shoot down a ki84 in my f4u-1d. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Even the Ki-84 and the Ki-100 are just barely able to be on par with the Allied fighters that are already in teh game. If you had the F4U-4 it'd be a significant step above any of them. So its not like the Japanese are suddenly tipping the scales...just evening up the ante.

From the looks of it, the Ki-100 will be just fast enough to keep up, an average to decent climber, good firepower, and average protection. Its Hellcat like in speed...so the Corsair, the Mustang, and if you want to count Russian types, the Yak-3 and La-7 are going to beat it on speed and in other attributes.

To the Japanese, the Ki-100 was a very good fighter that didn't have alot of engine problems and was otherwise part of a fairly reliable and battle tested fighter (the Ki-61). So you can see why they liked it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Nobody should be saying that the Allies are now going to be at a disadvantage by introducing this fighter. If you added the P-47N, the F4U-4, and any of the other very late war fighters you'd see them being totally superior to their opponents...not to just match them but to beat them utterly in nearly every respect. I'm all for adding whatever planes served by the way but it seems like there is some loss of perspective http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Besides, when you run an Allies VS Japanese dogfight server...everyone has to fly a Ki-84 if they want to keep up. When they fix the Ki-61 that will help to some extent. After that, another plane type would be good to keep things interesting.

Just four weeks ago everyone was saying that there weren't enough Japanese anything. I believe that 1C took that under advisement and devised a method to get us another aircraft as quickly as possible. Taking the Ki-61 and turning it into a Ki-100 would be tricky but not quite the same as building a new fighter entirely. Kudos for them!

Biloxi72
11-08-2004, 07:55 AM
Icefire,
good points sir, and being the corsair fan that i am a shamless plug for the ultimate corsair in WW2 should be expected http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Andi agree these later editon Ki's and possibly future george are needed to even the playing field for the Pacific. I was basing my call for late war corsair and p47 only on what has been seen in the aces world with the Ta152 and some fo the lesser known russian planes. But as it stands i am happy with the allied plane selection.

I was playing devil advocate on why people might start whining about these late war Japanese AC. That is why i opened up with Il2 has all craft performing at an optimal level and arguments will be based on.

geetarman
11-08-2004, 08:22 AM
The plane seems to have have good specs on paper and was well-liked by the Jaopanese Army pilots. It should make a nice addition to the Japanese side. and be very dangerous in a good pilot's hands.

That said, the performance of the Hellcat and Corsair in the game is great. I can't imagaine a dedicated Hellcat driver being overly concerned when flying against it.

As time goes on and pilots adjust to the new Navy mounts, those two planes will be all you need to compete with anything else in the game.
They do everything well enough that a good pilot can score and survive.

rugame
11-08-2004, 08:26 AM
hmm Ice, if what you say is true, and they turned the Ki100 around in a couple of weeks, then that is tops, unless it was one of the planes that did not make the deadline for the box version of PF

either way cool ,and bring it on.

Gunner_361st
11-08-2004, 09:31 AM
I'll take whatever they got coming to us. I sure would like to see a flyable Avenger and Kate though. But, another competetitive Japanese fighter can't do no harm.

As for keeping up; I find the biggest factor in late-war dogfight servers is pilot quality and tactics. How else do you think in an A6M5-B Zero I was able to take on 2 Corsairs and 1 P-51 at the same time, shoot down a Corsair and the '51, and have the second Corsair run away?

Top speed only matters when pilots fly disciplined and conservatively enough to keep it. Acceleration is far more important when a fight degrades into a dogfight.

Thats my perspective anyway. Bring on the KI-100. Anyone find any decent early-war dogfight servers btw? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BigKahuna_GS
11-08-2004, 10:20 AM
S!

__________________________________________________ _______________________
VW-IceFire
Tempest Maniac
Even the Ki-84 and the Ki-100 are just barely able to be on par with the Allied fighters that are already in teh game. If you had the F4U-4 it'd be a significant step above any of them. So its not like the Japanese are suddenly tipping the scales...just evening up the ante.
__________________________________________________ ________________________


Hi Ice I respect your opinon but, Ki-84s can dominate a fight at almost any altitude with their performance and manueverability. They are quite able to be more than par with any allied aircraft. I enjoy fighting them with a Corsair it is quite a challenge.

I am hoping for all axis and allied planes that saw action in the PTO during WW2 to be included. The P47M never made it into AEP and would have been a challenging match up for the Ta152. Historically speaking, to not include the the P47N in Pacific Fighters is just flat out wrong.

The Japanese side should receive future high performance fighters such as the George, Raiden, etc. IMHO the Pacific Fighters plane set should be historically accurate and include the P47N and F4U-4. What planes are allowed into servers is for the PF community to decide. I would just like to see a complete plane set.


_____

Mr_Nakajima
11-08-2004, 10:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Ant:
Ki-100-equipped unit destroyed 14 F6F Hellcat fighters without loss to themselves. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This claim comes from Japanese wartime propoganda. I have never been able to find an American account saying that half a carrier's complement of fighters was dispatched without being able to score a kill in return, and I think such an event very late in the war would have been traumatic enough to be a famous incident.

I haven't got my copy of Osprey's JAAF Aces with e (leant to my brother) but IIRC it mentions a wild, roof-top dogfight between Ki-100s and F6Fs over a Japanese airbase. Odds were roughly even, and the score was two all. If anyone has the book to hand please confirm!

Remember that the Ki-100 never attracted an Allied code name. To the pilots fighting it, its performance was simply not that outstanding that it was even identified as a new type of plane - Allied intelligence only discovered its existence after the end of the war.

This isn't to denigrate it - JAAF pilots themselves rated it as their best fighter, but it was no unreal monster.

DIRTY-MAC
11-08-2004, 11:13 AM
Does anyone have any good performance info on it?

Atomic_Marten
11-08-2004, 11:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr_Nakajima:
I haven't got my copy of Osprey's JAAF Aces with e (leant to my brother) but IIRC it mentions a wild, roof-top dogfight between Ki-100s and F6Fs over a Japanese airbase. Odds were roughly even, and the score was two all. If anyone has the book to hand please confirm! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here you go:

"The last major combat between the JAAF and the Americans occured on 25th July 1945 when 18 KI100s of the 244th Sentai encountered ten F6F-5 Hellcats over Yokaichi airfield on an early morning raid. In a fierce dogfight, Capt Tsurae Obara (8 kills) collided with Ens Edwin White and both were killed. Soon after WO Shin Ikuta and Ens Herbert Law were downed, the former dying in the subsequent crash, but Law surviving to return to the America from a PoW camp after the war.
The 244th claimed 12 H-Cats destroyed for the loss of two pilots, whilst VF-31 counter-claimed eight kills and three probables for the lost of two. As the most succesfull home defence unit of the war, the 244th Sentai ended the conflict with claims of 102 B29s shot down and 192 damaged." Osprey JAAF Aces 1937-45

That text is from page 73 of that book.

faustnik
11-08-2004, 12:42 PM
Bueschel list top speed for the Ki-100-1a at 587kph @ 6,000 meter. I can see how this would be a good fight for a Hellcat but, the P-51D and P-47D/N should have no problem with it. The USAAF fighters are just too fast.

Bogun
11-08-2004, 02:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Bueschel list top speed for the Ki-100-1a at 587kph @ 6,000 meter. I can see how this would be a good fight for a Hellcat but, the P-51D and P-47D/N should have no problem with it. The USAAF fighters are just too fast. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gentlemen,
I quickly compiled some info for you to be able to compare the performance of Ki-100 to the original La-5 (not the La-5F or La-5FN)
Here:
========================
Kawasaki Ki-100-Ia Army Type 5 Fighter Model 1a:

Dimensions:
Wingspan 10.5m
Length 8.85m
Wing area 20 sq.m.
Internal fuel 595l

Engine:
Mitsubishi Ha-112-II
Take-off power - 1500hp @ 2600rpm
Nominal power - 1350hp @ 2000m @ 2500rpm
Nominal power - 1250hp @ 5800m @ 2500rpm

Performance:
Wing Loading 174.8 kg/sq.m
Power Loading 2.33 kg/hp


Maximum speed
576 km/h at 6,000m
531 km/h at 10,000m

Climb 6,000m in 6 minutes
Service ceiling 11,000m
Maximum range 1,392km

Weights:
Empty weight 2,525kg
Normal loaded 3,495kg
Max loaded 3,762kg

Armament:
2 x Ho-5 20mm Cannon (Fuselage, 250rds each)
2 x Ho-103 12.7mm Machine Gun (Wing, 250rds each)
2 x 250kg bombs
========================
Lavotchkin La-5

Dimensions:
Wingspan 9.8m
Length 8.85m
Wing area 17.5sq.m.
Internal fuel 426.25l

Engine:
M-82A
Take-off power - 1676hp @ 0m (@2500rpm, @1140mm.Hg.) forsage 10 min limit.
Nominal power - 1540hp @ 2050m (@2400rpm, @950mm.Hg.)
Nominal power - 1330hp @ 5400m (@2400rpm, @950mm.Hg.)

Performance:
Wing Loading 188 kg/sq.m
Power Loading 1.96 kg/hp

Maximum speed (with forsaze)
556km/h at 0m
612km/h at 5,000m

Climb 5,000m in 5.1 minutes
Service ceiling 10,750m

Maximum range 1,000km

Weights:
Empty weight 2,828kg
Normal loaded 3,290kg

Armament:
2 x 20mm ShVAK cannons (200rds each)
2 x 100kg bombs
========================

faustnik
11-08-2004, 02:45 PM
Top speed for the P-51D was 435mph (700kph) at 25000 feet. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LBR_Barkhorn
11-08-2004, 03:06 PM
http://www.vectorsite.net/avhien6.jpg

The Japanese Army found itself faced with the prospect of 275 Ki-61-II airframes sitting around waiting for installation of their Ha-140 liquid-cooled engines. The Ha-140 engine had proven to be totally unreliable and to make matters worse, the factory manufacturing the Ha-140 had been destroyed in a B-29 raid. Since Japan desperately needed aircraft capable of intercepting the B-29's, in November of 1944 the Ministry of Munitions instructed Kawasaki to install a different powerplant in the Ki-61-II in an attempt to get as many aircraft in the air as possible.



After some sniffing around, Kawasaki finally settled on the 1500 hp Mitsubishi Ha-112-II fourteen-cylinder double-row radial engine. This engine had established a standard of easy maintenance and reliable service, which contrasted markedly with the notoriously unreliable and temperamental Ha-140. However, the Ha-112 was a radial engine, and, with a diameter of four feet, the installation of this engine in a fuselage only 33 inches wide provided a major challenge. However, the Kawasaki concern was guided in its work by being able to study the engine mount in an imported Focke-Wulf Fw 190A, an example in which a wide radial engine had been successfully installed in an airframe with a narrow width. In addition, the same Mitsubishi Ha-112 radial engine had been successfully installed in the Aichi-built D4Y3 (Allied code name JUDY) dive bomber, earlier versions of which had been powered by a liquid-cooled engine.



The new project was sufficiently different from the Ki-61 Hien that it was assigned a new Kitai number: Ki-100. Three Ki-61-II airframes were experimentally modified as Ki-100s by the installation of the Ha-112 radial. The first Ki-100 prototype aircraft made its first flight on February 1, 1945. The results of the flight testing exceeded everyone's expectations. The Ki-100 was about 600 pounds lighter than its Ki-61-II predecessor. Maneuverability and handling were markedly improved due to the lower wing and power loading. Although the maximum speed of the Ki-100 was slightly lower than that of the Ki-61-II because of the higher drag exerted by the radial engine, this performance could be reliably attained because of the better reliability of the Ha-112 engine. The design was ordered into immediate production as the Army Type 5 Fighter Model 1A (Ki-100-Ia). The first Type 5 fighters (Ki-100-Ia) were direct conversions of existing Ki-61-II airframes. 271 airframes were converted between March and June 1945, and were immediately delivered to operational units. The Ki-100 was simple to fly and maintain. Even the most inexperienced pilots were able to get the hang of the Ki-100 relatively quickly. The Ha-112 engine proved to be quite reliable and simple to maintain. In combat, the Ki-100-Ia proved to be an excellent fighter, especially at low altitudes. It possessed a definite ascendancy over the Grumman F6F Hellcat. In one encounter over Okinawa, a Ki-100-equipped unit destroyed 14 F6F Hellcat fighters without loss to themselves. When the Ki-100 encountered the P-51D Mustang at low or medium altitudes over Japan, it was able to meet the American fighter on more or less equal terms. The outcome of P- 51D vs Ki-100 battles was usually determined by piloting skill or by numerical advantage rather than by the relative merits of the two fighter types. However, at altitudes above 26,000 feet, the maneuverability of the Ki-100 began to fall off rather severely and the fighter was at a relative disadvantage in intercepting the high-flying B-29.



The Ki-61-I KAIc went into production in January 1944, and ultimately replaced production of all earlier models in August 1944. The Ki-61-I KAIc would become the heavily-produced version of the Hien (Swallow), accounting for over half the total number built. A few Ki-61-I KAId bomber interceptors were also built in late 1944. These variants incorporated two 12.7 millimeter guns in the fuselage and a 30 millimeter gun in each wing. So far as I am aware, the Ki-100 never had a separate Allied code name assigned to it. It may, for all I know, have been known under the code name of its predecessor --- TONY.



By June, 1945, all of the Ki-61-II airframes had been used up, and further Ki-100s were built from the outset as radial-powered machines. This version was designated Ki-100-Ib. The Ki-100-Ib differed from the Ki-100-Ia in having an all-round vision hood similar to that fitted to the experimental Ki-61-III. The first Ki-100-Ib fighters were built at the Kagamigahara and Ichinomiya Kawasaki factories in May of 1945, but production was severely hampered by the continual Allied bombing. Plans had been made to produce 200 fighters per month, but the Ichinomiya plant was forced to shut down in July 1945 after having built only 12 aircraft, and the Kagamigahara plant had its production severely curtailed by aerial attacks. By the time of the Japanese surrender, only 118 Ki-100-Ib aircraft had been delivered.



In an attempt to improve the high-altitude performance, the Ki-100-II version was evolved. It was powered by a 1500 hp Mitsubishi Ha-112-II Ru with a turbosupercharger and water-methanol injection to boost power for short intervals. Because of a lack of space, the turbosupercharger had to be mounted underneath the engine without provision for an intercooler and its associated ducting, with air being ducted directly from the compressor to the carburetor. It first flew in May 1945. The lack of an intercooler limited the high-altitude performance of the Ki-100-II, and the turbosupercharger added 600 pounds to the weight, which reduced maximum speed by 15 mph at 10,000 feet. However, the boosted high-altitude power enabled a maximum speed of 367 mph to be be reached at 32,800 feet (the cruising altitude of the B-29 during daylight operations). It had been planned to begin production of the Ki-100-II in September of 1945, but only three prototypes of this high-altitude interceptor had been produced by the time of the Japanese surrender.



A total of 396 Ki-100s were built, including 275 Ki-61-II conversions, 118 Ki-100-Ib production aircraft built from scratch, and three Ki-100-II prototypes. Most of them were assigned to the defense of the home islands, operating from Chofu and Yokkaichi from the spring of 1945. At the end of the war, two Ki-100-Ibs were shipped to the USA for evaluation. I don't know what happened to these planes. Presumably, they were scrapped in the late 1940s, along with a lot of other captured Axis aircraft.

Kawasaki Ki-100-I Tony Specifications

Type
Fighter

Power Plant
1xHa-112-II Kawasaki Army Type 5, 1,500 hp (1119 kw) 14 cylinder radial air cooled

Unladen weight
5,952 lb (2,700 kg)

Laden weight
8,091 lbs (3,670 kg)

Max Speed (Sea Level)


Max Speed (32,810 ft)
367 mph (590 kph)

Cruising Speed
217 mph (350 kph)

Climbing Rate
climb to 32,800 ft (10,000 m) in 20 min

Max range
1,243 mi (2,000 km)

Service Ceiling
35,005 ft (10,670 m)

Armament
2x12.7 mm (0.50) HO-103 (Type 1) machine guns, fuselage

2x20 mm HO-5 cannon, wings

Wingspan
39 ft 4.5in (12 m)

Length
28 ft 10.5in (8.8 m)

Height
12 ft 3.5in (3.75 m)

Wing Area
215.29 sq ft (20 sq m)

Giganoni
11-08-2004, 03:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:

Here you go:

"The last major combat between the JAAF and the Americans occured on 25th July 1945 when 18 KI100s of the 244th Sentai encountered ten F6F-5 Hellcats over Yokaichi airfield on an early morning raid. In a fierce dogfight, Capt Tsurae Obara (8 kills) collided with Ens Edwin White and both were killed. Soon after WO Shin Ikuta and Ens Herbert Law were downed, the former dying in the subsequent crash, but Law surviving to return to the America from a PoW camp after the war.
The 244th claimed 12 H-Cats destroyed for the loss of two pilots, whilst VF-31 counter-claimed eight kills and three probables for the lost of two. As the most succesfull home defence unit of the war, the 244th Sentai ended the conflict with claims of 102 B29s shot down and 192 damaged." _Osprey JAAF Aces 1937-45_

That text is from page 73 of that book. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That wasn't the last JAAF combat though. The last that I have was August 14th. 8 Ki-84s from the 47th Sentai bounced 6 P-51s and claimed five for the loss of two.

Snark7
11-08-2004, 04:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hendley:
That the Allies failed to recognize it as a new type doesn't necessarily mean much. Heck, for much of the war every single-engined Japanese fighter was invariably called a "Zero". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let me put it this way.... in most cases what caused "Tiger ! Tiger!" screams were actually Panzer IVs http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Maple_Tiger
11-08-2004, 04:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
S!

__________________________________________________ _______________________
VW-IceFire
Tempest Maniac
Even the Ki-84 and the Ki-100 are just barely able to be on par with the Allied fighters that are already in teh game. If you had the F4U-4 it'd be a significant step above any of them. So its not like the Japanese are suddenly tipping the scales...just evening up the ante.
__________________________________________________ ________________________


Hi Ice I respect your opinon but, Ki-84s can dominate a fight at almost any altitude with their performance and manueverability. They are quite able to be more than par with any allied aircraft. I enjoy fighting them with a Corsair it is quite a challenge.

I am hoping for all axis and allied planes that saw action in the PTO during WW2 to be included. The P47M never made it into AEP and would have been a challenging match up for the Ta152. Historically speaking, to not include the the P47N in Pacific Fighters is just flat out wrong.

The Japanese side should receive future high performance fighters such as the George, Raiden, etc. IMHO the Pacific Fighters plane set should be historically accurate and include the P47N and F4U-4. What planes are allowed into servers is for the PF community to decide. I would just like to see a complete plane set.


_____ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



Since there were about 10,000 Aevengers built, it should have a higher priority the Ki-100.

Snark7
11-08-2004, 04:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RufShod:
Nice thing about Il2 series is that all of these planes will be running at optimal performance standards. So the late war Japanese planes do not have to worry about poor craftmanship, lack of quality parts and poor fuel or lack of it. As for whining im sure some US pilots will be a bit miffed only that the Axis side for the most part get their late war craft and US gets all of it's early to mid war series. I think that the f4u-4 should be modeled and put into the game. It saw 6 months of action, produced in decent numbers and should not be that hard to find data on. I think that is why most Ameriwhiners do whine, we simply dont get all the late war craft while the axis does.
At least ill get a lot of satisfaction if i can shoot down a ki84 in my f4u-1d. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well, it doesn't matter anyhow, because all US-planes are overmodelled into the late to after-war models anyhow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Snark7
11-08-2004, 04:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr_Nakajima:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Ant:
Ki-100-equipped unit destroyed 14 F6F Hellcat fighters without loss to themselves. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This claim comes from Japanese wartime propoganda. I have never been able to find an American account saying that half a carrier's complement of fighters was dispatched without being able to score a kill in return, and I think such an event very late in the war would have been traumatic enough to be a famous incident. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which might exactly be, why it wasn't reported.

Snark7
11-08-2004, 04:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
Since there were about 10,000 Aevengers built, it should have a higher priority the Ki-100. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well.... but do you want to drive a VW Beetle in a racing game instead of a corvette on the basis that more were build ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

berg417448
11-08-2004, 04:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snark7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr_Nakajima:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Ant:
Ki-100-equipped unit destroyed 14 F6F Hellcat fighters without loss to themselves. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This claim comes from Japanese wartime propoganda. I have never been able to find an American account saying that half a carrier's complement of fighters was dispatched without being able to score a kill in return, and I think such an event very late in the war would have been traumatic enough to be a famous incident. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which might exactly be, why it wasn't reported. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


More likely why it never happened.

Maple_Tiger
11-08-2004, 04:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snark7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
Since there were about 10,000 Aevengers built, it should have a higher priority the Ki-100. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well.... but do you want to drive a VW Beetle in a racing game instead of a corvette on the basis that more were build ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



I thought this was a sim and not an arcade game?

ElAurens
11-08-2004, 05:27 PM
And now it begins...

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

DIRTY-MAC
11-11-2004, 01:37 PM
Back to topic

goshikisen
11-11-2004, 01:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
Since there were about 10,000 Avengers built, it should have a higher priority the Ki-100. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quite right... but, the cockpit is already built by way of the ki-61 and I'm sure the external model of the Hien can be modified to take a radial instead. Most of the work is already done for a Ki-100... it's just a matter of modifying already existing content. An Avenger cockpit would have to be built from scratch.

Regards, Goshikisen

DIRTY-MAC
11-11-2004, 02:11 PM
goshikisen
look at the development page http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

goshikisen
11-11-2004, 02:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
goshikisen
look at the development page http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Brain fade on my part... I've seen those dev. shots and am eagerly anticipating the Ki-100. I was speculating on how they would have built the plane... I think they can take the Hien external and modify it but don't know enough about the process to say yes or no. Just didn't want it to seem easier than it is when I have no idea.

I do know that the Ki-100 would be easier to incorporate than the Avenger and that's the main reason why it's in and the Avenger currently isn't.

VW-IceFire
11-11-2004, 02:54 PM
On the Avenger front...I suspect its already underway...but its not yet finished.

Effort gained on one plane does not necessarily equal effort lost on another. The Avenger is probably being done by separate people or a team and has little, if anything, to do with the efforts made to get a Ki-100 done.

Just like efforts on the N1K1-J have nothing to do with the efforts on the Ki-100. Except in that final stage where they merge the content into the game.

Snootles
11-11-2004, 03:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Since there were about 10,000 Aevengers built, it should have a higher priority the Ki-100. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, but we'll take 'em as they come. Besides, the Avenger is a much harder plane to make, what with the multi-crew interior and the special torpedo sight. It's probably taking a while to finish.